... the more they stay the same! As follow up to this post, I received a visit from 2 AC officers a few days ago. They asked me a few questions about the at-large dogs and we had a brief follow up conversation about it.
One thing about that conversation I really did NOT appreciate were the logical contortions they went through to absolve Rover and Fido.
Here is what I am talking about: I mentioned that another neighbor had seen the dogs kill and dismember a cat on her front lawn. They responded "ALLEGEDLY killed...". Apparently, the other complainant had not actually seen the dogs attack the living cat, merely tear it apart. I estimate she heard a commotion, and proceeded to a door/window after the dogs had already begun their dirty deed.
My response? A facepalm and a big eye-roll. This is insulting to the intelligence. Look, this block does not have a problem with dead cats strewn everywhere. The theory that the cat had a heart attack and died just prior to Rover and Fido happening along is REALLY far fetched. We are contemplating way past reasonable doubt here. Did a necropsy show the cat was already dead? No? Then the most likely explanation is Rover and Fido chased down the cat and killed it. No sane society would grant these sort of due-process protections to DOGS.
This was nothing but a big cop-out engineered to get Rover and Fido off the hook.
In any case, they did state that they intended to continue to cite the dog owner with escalating penalties as the offenses racked up. So, there is that.
Enjoy your Sunday afternoon!